The conference in
London brought together ocean experts, policymakers, fisheries associations,
business and civil society representatives and stakeholders to consider
strategies for developing national economies that protect marine resources and
people’s livelihoods and make sure that the benefits of the ocean are shared
equitably. This, in fact, is the definition of an Inclusive Blue Economy. A
term which is increasingly appearing in international
ocean policy.

The conference
touched upon two main topics: The Internationally Legally Binding Instrument
(ILBI) under the United Nations Convention on the Law
of the Sea on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity
of areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (ABNJ) and fiscal reforms to achieve an
inclusive blue economy.

“In theory a Blue
Economy is supposed to cater for social and ecological sustainability aspects.
However, a blue economy will not become inclusive nor equitable by default,”
says SwedBio marine programme officer Hanna Wetterstrand who attended and
reported back on the conference.

Negotiating benefits for all

Areas beyond national jurisdiction
are areas outside of the economic zones of nations. These areas are also
referred to as the ‘high seas’ or ‘international waters.’ They are found 200
nautical miles from nations coastlines and include the ocean floor. The not yet
utilised value of the oceans is estimated to USD 24 trillion including sectors
like energy generation, maritime transport, tourism, capture fisheries and
aquaculture (Hoegh-Guldber, et.al 2015).

With such unclear
jurisdiction and such a high economic value, how do we ensure that future high
seas governance regimes or treaties are equitable and benefit all? This was one
of the key questions put forth by the conference hosts.

While conventions
exist to protect these areas, they often fail to keep up with the rate of development
and resource exploitation. The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the
Sea (UNCLOS), recognize the ocean floor as ’common heritage of mankind’ and the
benefits arriving from it are intended to be shared equitably among people.
Today, deep sea mining and the extent and intensity of high seas fishing was
not in any imaginable pipeline. This has resulted in a big gap in governance to
deal with these kinds of issues.

The purpose of the
marine Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (ABNJ) negotiations is to develop a
benefit sharing mechanism as soon as possible. These negotiations are expected
to come to an end during the first half of 2020.

These negotiations are
usually presented as structured around four main areas:

Marine genetic resources, including issues of
access and benefit sharing

Throughout the
conference there was a genuine focus on the rights of small-scale fishers (SSF)
and vulnerable coastal communities, with at least two representatives from the
SSF sector present in the conference, invited as key note speakers.

More than 47million
people involved in small-scale fishing and trading are dependent on good
governance of the high seas. Despite this, research indicates that many governments of developing alongside
civil society organisations advocating for the rights of SSF, do not prioritise
engaging in the ABNJ negotiations.

Throughout the ABNJ negotiations
there has been a small group of countries disproportionally active, while Least
Developed Countries and Small Island States are significantly underrepresented.
This creates a risk of a skewed negotiation outcome which does not contribute
to the conservation, sustainable use and benefit sharing that it was set out to
achieve.

“My guess is the reason
for this inequality in the engagement in the negotiation probably has to with
the existing economic inequality in between the countries. I also sense a
belief that the high seas seem far away. It is perceived as something that does
not impact coastal areas significantly. With limited resources, they might
reason that they also have many more urgent issues to deal with closer to home,”
says Hanna Wetterstrand, SwedBio programme officer.

In one of the
conference sessions, Ekaterina Popova, an ocean modeller from the UK’s National
Oceanography Centre, made a convincing argument for why Least Developed Countries
and the Small Scale Fishers advocates should be concerned about the High Seas
governance.

“Ecologically, [the
high seas] are very much connected to coastal zones. There are two pieces of
evidence for this. One is the migratory nature of species, often migrating
through corridors between the high seas and coastal waters. The other is ocean
currents. People do not realise how fast and vigorous these are and how tightly
they connect to coastal waters,” Popva explained.

She held up a small
yellow rubber duck to the audience and said that if a million ducks like that
would be released into the high seas, it would take only six months until we
would see them pop up on our coasts. Thus, exploitation of the High Seas will
have noticeable impacts on the livelihoods of small-scale fishers.

Existing international
law under the Convention of Biological Diversity have already developed an
access and benefit sharing mechanism to ensure benefits gained from the high
seas, including from living-organisms (like fish) are shared equally.

It was also discussed by
participants at the conference that there is a need for capacity building and
transfer of relevant marine technology to developing nations. The International
Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) argued the need for a mechanism
to be set up by an independent multilateral institution that would facilitate
the “cooperation and inclusive
multi-stakeholder partnership and broker technology transfer and capacity
building.” The idea is that
developed countries should be obliged to regulate the private sector so that
any resource access they gain will be attached to commitments for technology transfer
to developing nations.

The hope is that these
discussions clarify to both small-scale fishers and the governments of Least
Developed Nations and Small Island States that they stand a lot to gain from engaging
more strongly in the ABNJ negotiations. Furthermore, since exploitive
activities in the High Seas risk to negatively affect the already vulnerable
coastal communities, they should be given a clear voice.

Taxes in the sea

The second topic of
the conference was that of fiscal reforms. Examples of fiscal tool are taxes,
tariffs, fees and penalties among others. There was a general conclusion that there
is a large un-tapped opportunity to use fiscal tools for enhancing
sustainability and environmental stewardship.

Taxes for instance are
usually used by policymakers to collect taxes rather than to guide a change in
behaviour, such as more sustainable and environmentally sound fishing
management. There is a large amount of alternative measures that could be
brought into steering development in a positive direction. “For instance,”
Hanna Wetterstand explains, “a government can start fairly compensating coastal
communities when, for conservation purposes, marine no-take zones are
established that negatively affect their livelihood. Tax schemes must be
designed carefully in order to care for gender issues and adapt to the local
circumstances.”

“Today 86% of the
global subsidies to the fish sector goes to large scale fishing, 16% to small
scale fishers and only 4% to the process sector where most women are involved. Simultaneously
as making use of fiscal tools so enhance sustainability and equity, the harmful
fisheries subsidies should be eliminated,” explains Professor Ussif Rashid
Sumaila, Professor and Director of the Fisheries Economics Research Unit at the
University of British Columbias’s Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries.

These figures were used
again by Editrudith Lukanga, the general secretary for the African Women Fish
Processors and Traders network and Co-President of World Forum of Fish
Harvesters and Fish Workers, when advocating for increased subsidies to Small
Scale Fishers and in particular to women in the trading and processing sectors.

“Women play a crucial
role in the small scale fishery sector (SSF) and their role should be
increasingly recognised. About 47% of workers in the Small Scale Fisheries
sector are women and in the post-harvest, it is as much as 90%.” Despite this
number, Lukanga goes on, “they are still they looked down upon by policy makers
since their contribution to the national GDP is ‘negligible’”. “Women in the
SSF sector should also have right to influence decisions that affect them”, Lukanga
emphasises.

SwedBio's mission

SwedBio is a knowledge interface on resilience & development at Stockholm Resilience Centre.

Our mission is to enable knowledge generation, dialogue and exchange between practitioners, policymakers and scientists for development and implementation of policies and methods – which contribute to poverty alleviation, equity, sustainable livelihoods and social-ecological systems rich in biodiversity that persist, adapt and transform under global change.